Re: modeling location-of or birth-place-of

Hi Karl,

There are three possible patterns for this, but first are Web Annotations
really the right tool to be using for this?  It sounds like you want
something with a stronger data model, rather than a framework for
associating resources together.

Option 1:  Machine Readable Body

My preferred solution for these sorts of things is simply to have all of
the assertions in the body of the annotation.  In the same way that you
might write the place and time in English as a body, it's quite possible to
write in XML, JSON, RDF or whatever other syntax is convenient.  This keeps
the annotation assertions and the content assertions separate, allowing
different agents to be responsible (and hence potentially credited) for
them.  The downside is that you need to separately parse the body to
understand the content [which is by design, but might be unpalatable].

Option 2: Create a new Motivation

Another option is to create a new motivation that mirrors the
predicate/relationship you want to assert, such as
yyy:asserting-place-of-birth or zzz:asserting-place-of-creation.
Then the place is the body and the thing receiving the place is the target.
The advantage is that everything is parsed by your annotation system, the
disadvantage is that now you've mirrored your entire ontology into a set of
motivation extensions -- probably as narrower terms than oa:tagging.

Option 3: Create a new Property

Finally, you could simply add new properties to the model to describe the
relationships you want to assert. The advantage is that you're not
duplicating your ontology, the downside is that no other system will
process your extensions.  The reason we didn't put this into the model is
that RDF already has a reification pattern, which is generally unloved and
we didn't want to bring it in to scope of the work, as we would start to
compete with other standards like LDP.

Hope that helps,

Rob








On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 3:42 PM, karlg <karl.geog@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> I’m trying to model the annotation of a resource for any sort of thing
> with a resource for a place, and it needs to allow for a valid time. Can’t
> see how so far, any ideas would be helpful.
>
>
>
> For example, annotating a record for a person (target) with a record for a
> place (body). The person wasn’t always at the place, so the relation
> between them needs to include a valid date range somehow. Maybe restricting
> the relation to type, e.g. “birthplace,” or “created-at” in the case of a
> creative work.
>
>
>
> The goal is descriptions of places that include all sorts of items that
> have been annotated as being located there, generally, but critically also
> for some date range.
>
>
>
> thanks
>
>
>
> --
>
> Karl Grossner, PhD
>
> Technical Director, World-Historical Gazetteer
>
> University of Pittsburgh World History Center
>
> e: karl.geog@gmail.com
>
> t: @kgeographer
>
>
>



-- 
Rob Sanderson
Semantic Architect
The Getty Trust
Los Angeles, CA 90049